Methodology

Our methodology explains how supplement topics are evaluated before they become ingredient pages, product news, tools, or research articles.

Evidence hierarchy

We give the most weight to replicated human outcomes, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, government nutrient references, and clinical guidelines. Mechanistic, animal, and in vitro findings can explain plausibility, but they do not prove a supplement works in people.

What each page should answer

What the ingredient is and how it is commonly used.
Which benefits are supported, mixed, preliminary, or unsupported.
What dose ranges have been studied and how they compare with upper limits.
Which forms, strains, salts, extracts, or delivery systems matter.
Who should use caution because of medications, pregnancy, age, kidney disease, liver disease, surgery, or allergies.

Product-category methodology

Product pages should evaluate ingredient rationale, dose transparency, third-party testing, contaminant risk, label accuracy, contraindications, and whether claims match available evidence. Affiliate potential is not an evidence criterion.

Update triggers

Pages may be updated when new trials are published, regulatory agencies issue safety alerts, guidelines change, products are reformulated, broken citations are found, or readers identify credible corrections.

Medical disclaimer: dietarysupplement.ai publishes educational information only. Our content is not medical advice and is not a substitute for diagnosis, treatment, or care from a qualified healthcare professional. These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. Supplements are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease.